Patient Safety in Surgery最新文献

Background: Open reduction and plate fixation is a standard procedure for treating traumatic symphyseal disruptions, but has a high incidence of implant failure. Several studies have attempted to identify predictors for implant failure and discussed its impact on functional outcome presenting conflicting results. Therefore, this study aimed to identify predictors of implant failure and to investigate the impact of implant failure on pain and functional outcome.

Methods: In a single-center, retrospective, observational non-controlled cohort study in a level-1 trauma center from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2017, 42 patients with a plate fixation of a traumatic symphyseal disruption aged ≥ 18 years with a minimum follow-up of 12 months were included. The following parameters were examined in terms of effect on occurrence of implant failure: age, body mass index (BMI), injury severity score (ISS), polytrauma, time to definitive treatment, postoperative weight-bearing, the occurrence of a surgical site infection, fracture severity, type of posterior injury, anterior and posterior fixation. A total of 25/42 patients consented to attend the follow- up examination, where pain was assessed using the Numerical Rating Scale and functional outcome using the Majeed Pelvic Score.

Results: Sixteen patients had an anterior implant failure (16/42; 37%). None of the parameters studied were predictive for implant failure. The median follow-up time was six years and 8/25 patients had implant failure. There was no difference in the Numerical Rating Scale, but the work-adjusted Majeed Pelvic Score showed a better outcome for patients with implant failure.

Conclusion: implant failure after symphyseal disruptions is not predictable, but appears to be clinically irrelevant. Therefore, an additional sacroiliac screw to prevent implant failure should be critically discussed and plate removal should be avoided in asymptomatic patients.

Traumatic pelvic ring injuries continue to represent a major challenge due to the high rates of post-injury mortality of around 30-40% in the peer-reviewed literature. The main root cause of potentially preventable mortality relates to the delayed recognition of the extent of retroperitoneal hemorrhage and post-injury coagulopathy. The understanding of the underlying pathophysiology of pelvic trauma is predicated by classification systems for grading of injury mechanism and risk stratification for developing post-injury coagulopathy with subsequent uncontrolled exsanguinating hemorrhage. This review article elaborates on the current understanding of the pathophysiology of severe pelvic trauma with a focus on the underlying mechanisms of retroperitoneal bleeding and associated adverse outcomes.

Background: Mortality of patients with a femoral neck fracture is high, especially within the first year after surgery, but also remains elevated thereafter. The aim of this study was to identify factors potentially associated with long-term mortality in patients homogeneously treated with hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fracture.

Methods: This retrospective cohort study was performed at a single level 1 national trauma center at the university hospital of Leipzig (Saxony, Germany). The study time-window was January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2020. Primary outcome measure was mortality depending on individual patient-related characteristics and perioperative risk factors. Inclusion criteria was a low-energy femoral neck fracture (Garden I-IV) in geriatric patients 60 years of age or older that were primarily treated with bipolar hemiarthroplasty. Date of death or actual residence of patients alive was obtained from the population register of the eastern German state of Saxony, Germany. The outcome was tested using the log-rank test and plotted using Kaplan-Meier curves. Unadjusted and adjusted for other risk factors such as sex and age, hazard ratios were calculated using Cox proportional hazards models and presented with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Results: The 458 included patients had a median age of 83 (IQR 77-89) years, 346 (75%) were female and 113 (25%) male patients. Mortality rates after 30 days, 1, 5 and 10 years were 13%, 25%, 60% and 80%, respectively. Multivariate regression analysis revealed age (HR = 1.1; p < 0.001), male gender (HR = 1.6; p < 0.001), ASA-Score 3-4 vs. 1-2 (HR = 1.3; p < 0.001), dementia (HR = 1.9; p < 0.001) and a history of malignancy (HR = 1.6; p = 0.002) as independent predictors for a higher long-term mortality risk. Perioperative factors such as preoperative waiting time, early surgical complications, or experience of the surgeon were not associated with a higher overall mortality.

Conclusions: In the present study based on data from the population registry from Saxony, Germany the 10-year mortality of older patients above 60 years of age managed with hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fracture was 80%. Independent risk factors for increased long-term mortality were higher patient age, male gender, severe comorbidity, a history of cancer and in particular dementia. Perioperative factors did not affect long-term mortality.

Background: Optimizing transitional care by practicing family-centered care might reduce unplanned events for patients who undergo major abdominal cancer surgery. However, it remains unknown whether involving family caregivers in patients' healthcare also has negative consequences for patient safety. This study assessed the safety of family involvement in patients' healthcare by examining the cause of unplanned events in patients who participated in a family involvement program (FIP) after major abdominal cancer surgery.

Methods: This is a secondary analysis focusing on the intervention group of a prospective cohort study conducted in the Netherlands. Data were collected from April 2019 to May 2022. Participants in the intervention group were patients who engaged in a FIP. Unplanned events were analyzed, and root causes were identified using the medical version of a prevention- and recovery-information system for monitoring and analysis (PRISMA) that analyses unintended events in healthcare. Unplanned events were compared between patients who received care from family caregivers and patients who received professional at-home care after discharge. A Mann-Whitney U test was used to analyze data.

Results: Of the 152 FIP participants, 68 experienced an unplanned event and were included. 112 unplanned events occurred with 145 root causes since some unplanned events had several root causes. Most root causes of unplanned events were patient-related factors (n = 109, 75%), such as patient characteristics and disease-related factors. No root causes due to inadequate healthcare from the family caregiver were identified. Unplanned events did not differ statistically (interquartile range 1-2) (p = 0.35) between patients who received care from trained family caregivers and those who received professional at-home care after discharge.

Conclusion: Based on the insights from the root-cause analysis in this prospective multicenter study, it appears that unplanned emergency room visits and hospital readmissions are not related to the active involvement of family caregivers in surgical follow-up care. Moreover, surgical follow-up care by trained family caregivers during hospitalization was not associated with increased rates of unplanned adverse events. Hence, the concept of active family involvement by proficiently trained family caregivers in postoperative care appears safe and feasible for patients undergoing major abdominal surgery.

Background: Limited data exists regarding the impact of anesthesia residents on operating room efficiency and patient safety outcomes. This investigation hypothesized that supervised anesthesiology residents do not increase anesthesia-controlled or prolonged extubation times compared to supervised certified registered nurse anesthetists (CRNA)/certified anesthesiologist assistants (CAA) or anesthesiologists working independently. Secondary objectives included differences in critical outcomes such as intraoperative hypotension, cardiac and pulmonary complications, acute kidney injury, and mortality.

Methods: This retrospective single-center 24-month (January 1, 2020- December 31, 2021) cohort focused on primary outcomes of anesthesia-controlled times and prolonged extubation (>15 min) with additional assessment of secondary patient outcomes in adult patients having general anesthesia with an endotracheal tube or laryngeal mask airway for elective non-cardiac surgery. The study excluded sedation, obstetric, endoscopic, ophthalmology, and non-operating room procedures. Procedures were divided into three groups: anesthesiologists working solo, anesthesiologists supervising residents, or anesthesiologists supervising CRNA/CAAs. After univariate analysis, multivariable models were constructed to control for the univariate cofactor differences in the primary and secondary outcomes.

Results: A total of 15,084 surgical cases met the inclusion criteria for this study for the three different care models: solo anesthesiologists (1,204 cases), anesthesiologist/resident pairing (3,146 cases), and anesthesiologist/CRNA/CAA (14,040 cases). Before multivariate analysis, the resident group exhibited longer anesthesia-controlled times (median, [interquartile range], 26.1 [21.7-32.0], p < 0.001), compared to CRNA/CAA (23.9 [19.7-29.5]), and attending-only surgical cases (21.0 [17.9-25.4]). After adjusting for covariates in a general linear regression model (age, BMI, ASA classification, comorbidities, arterial line insertion, surgical service, and surgical location), there were no significant differences in the anesthesia-controlled times between the provider groups. Prolonged extubation times (>15 min) were significantly less common in the anesthesiologist-only group compared to the other groups (p < 0.001). Despite these time differences, there were no clinically significant differences among the groups in postoperative pulmonary or cardiac complications, renal impairment, or the 30-day mortality rate of patients.

Conclusion: Anesthesia residents do not increase anesthesia-controlled operating room times or adversely affect clinically relevant patient outcomes compared to anesthesiologists working independently or supervising certified registered nurse anesthetists or certified anesthesiologist assistants.

Machine learning algorithms have the potential to significantly improve patient safety in spine surgeries by providing healthcare professionals with valuable insights and predictive analytics. These algorithms can analyze preoperative data, such as patient demographics, medical history, and imaging studies, to identify potential risk factors and predict postoperative complications. By leveraging machine learning, surgeons can make more informed decisions, personalize treatment plans, and optimize surgical techniques to minimize risks and enhance patient outcomes. Moreover, by harnessing the power of machine learning, healthcare providers can make data-driven decisions, personalize treatment plans, and optimize surgical interventions, ultimately enhancing the quality of care in spine surgery. The findings highlight the potential of integrating artificial intelligence in healthcare settings to mitigate risks and enhance patient safety in surgical practices. The integration of machine learning holds immense potential for enhancing patient safety in spine surgeries. By leveraging advanced algorithms and predictive analytics, healthcare providers can optimize surgical decision-making, mitigate risks, and personalize treatment strategies to improve outcomes and ensure the highest standard of care for patients undergoing spine procedures. As technology continues to evolve, the future of spine surgery lies in harnessing the power of machine learning to transform patient safety and revolutionize surgical practices. The present review article was designed to discuss the available literature in the field of machine learning techniques to enhance patient safety in spine surgery.

Background: Patients with unplanned readmissions to the intensive care unit (ICU) are at high risk of preventable adverse events. The Rothman Index represents an objective real-time grading system of a patient's clinical condition and a predictive tool of clinical deterioration over time. This study was designed to test the hypothesis that the Rothman Index represents a sensitive predictor of unanticipated ICU readmissions.

Methods: A retrospective propensity-matched cohort study was performed at a tertiary referral academic medical center in the United States from January 1, 2022, to December 31, 2022. Inclusion criteria were adult patients admitted to an ICU and readmitted within seven days of transfer to a lower level of care. The control group consisted of patients who were downgraded from ICU without a subsequent readmission. The primary outcome measure was in-hospital mortality or discharge to hospice for end-of-life care. Secondary outcome measures were overall hospital length of stay, ICU length of stay, and 30-day readmission rates. Propensity matching was used to control for differences between the study cohorts. Regression analyses were performed to determine independent risk factors of an unplanned readmission to ICU.

Results: A total of 5,261 ICU patients met the inclusion criteria, of which 212 patients (4%) had an unanticipated readmission to the ICU within 7 days. The study cohort and control group were stratified by propensity matching into equal group sizes of n = 181. Lower Rothman Index scores (reflecting higher physiologic acuity) at the time of downgrade from the ICU were significantly associated with an unplanned readmission to the ICU (p < 0.0001). Patients readmitted to ICU had a lower mean Rothman Index score (p < 0.0001) and significantly increased rates of mortality (19.3% vs. 2.2%, p < 0.0001) and discharge to hospice (14.4% vs. 6.1%, p = 0.0073) compared to the control group of patients without ICU readmission. The overall length of ICU stay (mean 8.0 vs. 2.2 days, p < 0.0001) and total length of hospital stay (mean 15.8 vs. 7.3 days, p < 0.0001) were significantly increased in patients readmitted to ICU, compared to the control group.

Conclusion: The Rothman Index represents a sensitive predictor of unanticipated readmissions to ICU, associated with a significantly increased mortality and overall ICU and hospital length of stay. The Rothman Index should be considered as a real-time objective measure for prediction of a safe downgrade from ICU to a lower level of care.

Background: Patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) are increasing, challenging surgeons to adjust post-operative pain management guidelines. A literature review identified limited information on how to best care for these patients. The purpose of this study was to determine surgical perioperative management of OUD, challenges, and support needed for optimal care.

Methods: This study utilized an anonymous voluntary survey that was distributed to members of the American College of Surgeons through the association's electronic weekly newsletter. The survey was advertised weekly for three consecutive weeks. The survey included questions regarding surgeons' management of perioperative pain in patients with opioid use disorder and perceived barriers in treatment.

Results: A total of 260 surgeons responded representing all specialties except ophthalmology. General surgery (66.5%) and plastic and reconstructive surgery (7.5%) represented the majority of responders. Ninety-five percent of surgeons reported treating a patient who used opioids in the past month and 86% encountered a patient with OUD. Nearly half (46%) reported being uncomfortable managing postoperative pain in patients with OUD. Most (67%) were not aware of any guidelines or standards pertaining to perioperative management of patients with OUD. While consultation was sought by 86% of surgeons, analyses identified lack of timely response and a lack of care coordination among specialists. Lack of knowledge and fear of harm (contributing further to addiction) were the most common themes.

Conclusion: Nearly half of surgeons report discomfort caring for patients with OUD with the vast majority involving a consulting service to assist with their care. Most surgeons believe that it would be helpful to have guidelines regarding the care of these patients. This provides an opportunity for increased education and training on the perioperative management of patients with OUD and further collaboration with addiction medicine, psychiatry and pain management colleagues.

Background: Healthcare systems are operating under substantial pressures, and often simply cannot provide the standard of care they aspire to within the available resources. Organisations, managers, and individual clinicians make constant adaptations in response to these pressures, which are typically improvised, highly variable and not coordinated across clinical teams. The purpose of this study was to identify and describe the types of everyday pressures experienced by surgical teams and the adaptive strategies they use to respond to these pressures.

Methods: We conducted interviews with 20 senior multidisciplinary healthcare professionals from surgical teams in four major hospitals in the United Kingdom. The interviews explored the types of everyday pressures staff were experiencing, the strategies they use to adapt, and how these strategies might be taught to others.

Results: The primary pressures described by senior clinicians in surgery were increased numbers and complexity of patients alongside shortages in staff, theatre space and post-surgical beds. These pressures led to more difficult working conditions (e.g. high workloads) and problems with system functioning such as patient flow and cancellation of lists. Strategies for responding to these pressures were categorised into increasing or flexing resources, controlling and prioritising patient demand and strategies for managing the workload (scheduling for efficiency, communication and coordination, leadership, and teamwork strategies).

Conclusions: Teams are deploying a range of strategies and making adaptations to the way care is delivered. These findings could be used as the basis for training programmes for surgical teams to develop coordinated strategies for adapting under pressure and to assess the impact of different combinations of strategies on patient safety and surgical outcomes.

Background: In spite of the global implementation of surgical safety checklists to improve patient safety, patients undergoing surgical procedures remain vulnerable to a high risk of potentially preventable complications and adverse outcomes. The present study was designed to explore the surgical teams' perceptions of patient safety culture, capture their perceptions of the risk for adverse events, and identify themes of interest for quality improvement within the surgical department.

Methods: This qualitative study had an explorative design with an abductive approach. Individual semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted between 10/01/23 and 11/05/23. The participants were members of surgical teams (n = 17), general and orthopedic surgeons (n = 5), anesthesiologists (n = 4), nurse anesthetists (n = 4) and operating room nurses (n = 4). Middle managers recruited purposively from general and orthopedic surgical teams in two tertiary hospitals in Norway, aiming for a maximum variation due to gender, age, and years within the specialty. The data material was analyzed following Braun and Clarke's method for reflexive thematic analysis to generate patterns of meaning and develop themes and subthemes.

Results: The analysis process resulted in three themes describing the participants' perceptions of patient safety culture in the surgical context: (1) individual accountability as a safety net, (2) psychological safety as a catalyst for well-being and safe performance in the operating room, and (3) the importance of proactive structures and participation in organizational learning.

Conclusions: This study provided an empirical insight into the culture of patient safety in the surgical context. The study highlighted the importance of supporting the individuals' competence, building psychological safety in the surgical team, and creating structures and culture promoting a learning organization. Quality improvement projects, including interventions based on these results, may increase patient safety culture and reduce the frequency of adverse events in the surgical context.